I am afraid that the republicans have thrown away their chance, however slim, to win the election. Not by selecting Romney as their candidate since I think he is the best of what's available to choose from, regardless of his religious affiliation. But rather by the way the potential candidates attacked each other up to this point. Obama doesn't need to make any campaign ads, all he needs to do is replay all the ads from Romney's primary opponents.

If the Republican party, meaning it's leaders, had really been sincere about wanting to win in November they would have had a private conclave to select their candidate and then scripted a primary campaign where everybody played nice and left out all the negative rhetoric about each other.Bob DeWoody

My motto: Never do today what you can put off until tomorrow as it may not be required. This no longer applies in light of current events.

The general view over the Pond is that, rightly or wrongly, Obama is likely to get re-elected. Has that radically changed?

I don't really think so. I think Obama's got this one all wrapped up already. But it sure could be fun to discuss what's wrong with the republican party. :-D
(AND the Democrats as well, to be fair)#resist

Since FDR I never heard of any big elite millionare won this kind of election even FDR was dedicated to be anti republican.

What Ross Perot twice run and electors twice handled him well.

I guess you never heard of George Bush, senior or junior. The Bush family is most likely a lot richer than Mit Romney's.

Oh, and also, I guess you never heard of the Kennedys either.

Yes I have some limited knowledge about alien countries. What I was guessing is Romney maybe second richest candidate after Perot.

I don't know the money facts. But Romney is rich, yes. However I HIGHLY DOUBT he has anywhere near the money of the Bush empire. That's a whole 'nother breed.

One of the richest families in the country/world the Bushs are. In bed with Saudi oil families. Making and breaking policies to fit their needs, not doing anyone any good but themselves. Bush Jr gets into office and him and his VP are heavily invested in fossil fuels, did anyone notice that when he got into office gas and oil skyrocketed. This is what some of us call market manipulation. I'll go a step further and call it theft.

Back on topic, I'd rather have a gov't that looks out for it's people. I do NOT consider that socialism (Guy).#resist

Since FDR I never heard of any big elite millionare won this kind of election even FDR was dedicated to be anti republican.

What Ross Perot twice run and electors twice handled him well.

I guess you never heard of George Bush, senior or junior. The Bush family is most likely a lot richer than Mit Romney's.

Oh, and also, I guess you never heard of the Kennedys either.

Yes I have some limited knowledge about alien countries. What I was guessing is Romney maybe second richest candidate after Perot.

I don't know the money facts. But Romney is rich, yes. However I HIGHLY DOUBT he has anywhere near the money of the Bush empire. That's a whole 'nother breed.

One of the richest families in the country/world the Bushs are. In bed with Saudi oil families. Making and breaking policies to fit their needs, not doing anyone any good but themselves. Bush Jr gets into office and him and his VP are heavily invested in fossil fuels, did anyone notice that when he got into office gas and oil skyrocketed. This is what some of us call market manipulation. I'll go a step further and call it theft.

Back on topic, I'd rather have a gov't that looks out for it's people. I do NOT consider that socialism (Guy).

Let's not forget that GHW Bush's daddy made his money selling to the Nazis even after it was illegal.
We could of course look at the Kennedy's who made their money off of rum running ... and so on.

BTW Perot did very well the first time around in 1992. His purposals sounded reasonable but in reality (and we found out more in 1996) that it was Bat $hi7 crazy. The teapartyers are just a rebirth of his failed idea. In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

Bob, I think Republican leadership really doesn't want to win in 2012. They see the economy as a trainwreck (including all their actions as well as actions by the Democrats) and prefer the idea of four more years in which they can blame the Democrats. The economy is not going to suddenly get better under a Romney + TeaParty domination in 2013/2014 and Republican leadership would prefer the safety of opposition.

I don't know the money facts. But Romney is rich, yes. However I HIGHLY DOUBT he has anywhere near the money of the Bush empire. That's a whole 'nother breed.

One of the richest families in the country/world the Bushs are. In bed with Saudi oil families. Making and breaking policies to fit their needs, not doing anyone any good but themselves. Bush Jr gets into office and him and his VP are heavily invested in fossil fuels, did anyone notice that when he got into office gas and oil skyrocketed. This is what some of us call market manipulation. I'll go a step further and call it theft.

Back on topic, I'd rather have a gov't that looks out for it's people. I do NOT consider that socialism (Guy).

Let's not forget that GHW Bush's daddy made his money selling to the Nazis even after it was illegal.
We could of course look at the Kennedy's who made their money off of rum running ... and so on.

BTW Perot did very well the first time around in 1992. His purposals sounded reasonable but in reality (and we found out more in 1996) that it was Bat $hi7 crazy. The teapartyers are just a rebirth of his failed idea.

It seems the 1% some how ruled 99% either left and right ways most of the time: